IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v29y1997i7p1275-1296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Look at Gentrification: 1. Gentrification and Domestic Technologies

Author

Listed:
  • P A Redfern

    (23 Cheniston Gardens, London W8 6TG, England)

Abstract

In this paper I take issue with what I identify as a basic consensus in gentrification studies. I argue that gentrification studies have been conducted within a context framed by two basic models of urban development, namely the Burgess concentric-zone model and the Alonso bid-rent model. These two models lie at the heart of what are more usually seen as the parameters of the gentrification debate, namely the ‘supply-side’ rent-gap account of gentrification offered by Neil Smith and his followers and the ‘demand-side’ consumption-oriented explanations offered by David Ley and his followers. Both sets of explanations are, however, fatally compromised by seeking to answer the question ‘why does gentrification occur?’ before answering the question ‘how does gentrification occur?’. Starting with the question ‘how?’, rather than ‘why?’, draws attention to the hitherto almost completely neglected role of domestic technologies in permitting gentrification to occur, thereby helping break the theoretical logjam in which the gentrification debate currently finds itself.

Suggested Citation

  • P A Redfern, 1997. "A New Look at Gentrification: 1. Gentrification and Domestic Technologies," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(7), pages 1275-1296, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:29:y:1997:i:7:p:1275-1296
    DOI: 10.1068/a291275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a291275
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a291275?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P A Redfern, 1997. "A New Look at Gentrification: 2. A Model of Gentrification," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(8), pages 1335-1354, August.
    2. Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. P.A. Redfern, 2003. "What Makes Gentrification 'Gentrification'?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(12), pages 2351-2366, November.
    2. Garbellini, Nadia, 2020. "Measurement without theory, and theory without measurement: What's wrong with Piketty's capital in the XXI century?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 50-62.
    3. Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh, 1999. "Materials, Capital, Direct/Indirect Substitution, and Mass Balance Production Functions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 547-561.
    4. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Engelbert Stockhammer & Paul Ramskogler, 2009. "Post-Keynesian economics How to move forward," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 6(2), pages 227-246.
    6. Brendan Markey†Towler, 2017. "The Oxford Handbook of Post†Keynesian Economics, Volume 1: Theory and Origins," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(303), pages 659-661, December.
    7. Nuno Ornelas Martins, 2014. "Inequality, Sustainability and Piketty’s Capital," Working Papers de Economia (Economics Working Papers) 05, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
    8. Chris Hamnett, 2003. "Gentrification and the Middle-class Remaking of Inner London, 1961-2001," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(12), pages 2401-2426, November.
    9. Alan Freeman, 1998. "A General Refutation of Okishio’s Theorem and a Proof of the Falling Rate of Profit," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Riccardo Bellofiore (ed.), Marxian Economics: A Reappraisal, chapter 10, pages 139-162, Palgrave Macmillan.
    10. Eckhard Hein, 2016. "Secular stagnation or stagnation policy? Steindl after Summers," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 69(276), pages 3-47.
    11. Mark Setterfield & Joana David Avritzer, 2020. "Hysteresis in the normal rate of capacity utilization: A behavioral explanation," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 898-919, November.
    12. John Hatch & Colin Rogers, 1997. "Distinguished Fellow of the Economic Society of Australia, 1996: Professor Emeritus Geoff Harcourt," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 73(221), pages 97-100, June.
    13. Ajit Sinha, 2015. "A Reflection on the Samuelson-Garegnani Debate," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 4(2), pages 1-48, September.
    14. G.C. Harcourt, 2011. "Post-Keynesian theory, direct action and political involvement," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 8(1), pages 117-128.
    15. Timothy J. Garrett & Matheus R. Grasselli & Stephen Keen, 2020. "Past production constrains current energy demands: persistent scaling in global energy consumption and implications for climate change mitigation," Papers 2006.03718, arXiv.org.
    16. Kazuhiro Kurose, 2022. "A two-class economy from the multi-sectoral perspective: the controversy between Pasinetti and Meade–Hahn–Samuelson–Modigliani revisited," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 239-270, April.
    17. Amitava Krishna Dutt, 1989. "Sectoral Balance: A Survey," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-1989-056, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    18. Robert Dixon, 2018. "Marx 200 years on," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 29(4), pages 481-500, December.
    19. Martin Ricketts, 2014. "Hayek and economic theory in the 1930s," Chapters, in: Roger W. Garrison & Norman Barry (ed.), Elgar Companion to Hayekian Economics, chapter 3, pages 47-70, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Jeon, Heesang, 2015. "Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory," Thesis Commons g5njk, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:29:y:1997:i:7:p:1275-1296. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.